The appetite for litigating the impacts and potential impacts related to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) does not seem to be waning. The range of companies targeted for PFAS litigation includes chemical manufacturing, paper and packaging, fire-fighting foam suppressants, textiles, apparel, cosmetics, and many more. This is before factoring in the CERCLA (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) listing for two PFAS: perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS).
3M Multi-Billion-Dollar PFAS Settlement
The recently announced $7.35 billion 3M settlement for PFAS exposure has attracted attention. Billion-dollar PFAS Lawsuits are not new to 3M (for example, see our blog, “Not Enough Gold in Fort Knox to Cover PFAS Liability”).
According to a Press Release from 3M:
Under the agreement, 3M will make a pre-tax $7.35 billion nominal commitment over nine years, with a present value of $5.8 billion. The agreement:
- Addresses approximately 99% of current personal injury claims inside and outside the Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) MDL (Multi-District Litigation), involving approximately 115,000 – 120,000 plaintiffs eligible to participate in the resolution, including all personal injury claims that have been the focus of the AFFF MDL litigation.
- Includes a $50 million payment in 2026, and no payments in 2027, with approximately 20% of payments due in the final two years, to align to 3M’s remaining payment obligations for other legacy settlements.
Augusta, Maine, Sues Over PFAS Impacts
The Greater Augusta (Maine) Utility District filed a lawsuit against five paper and packaging companies for allegedly contaminating local waterways with PFAS. The lawsuit names Huhtamaki and Sappi North America for their paper and packaging operations. The lawsuit also names tissue producers Kimberly-Clark, American Tissue Corporation, and American Tissue Mills of Maine.
Greater Augusta requests a jury trial. It wants the defendants to pay past and future costs incurred to remediate PFAS from the water supply and its sources, along with other costs related to negligence and “continuing public nuisance.”
Source: Packaging Dive
It was reported that one of the municipal wells was shut down after a 2024 detection of a combination of six PFAS compounds at 23.3 parts per trillion (ppt). Maine has established a limit of 20 ppt (parts per trillion) for the combination of six PFAS or PFAS 6 (PFAS 6 = PFOA [Perfluorooctanoic acid], PFOS [Perfluorooctane sulfonate], PFHxS [Perfluorohexane sulfonic acid], PFNA [Perfluorononanoic acid], PFHpA [Perfluoroheptanoic acid], and PFDA [Perfluorodecanoic acid]).
The appetite for litigating the impacts and potential impacts related to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) does not seem to be waning (Image purchased from Shutterstock).
Previous PFAS “Eco-Friendly” Complaint
Previously, Huhtamaki was sued under a class-action complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, San Fransico, Division. That case exemplified the breadth of PFAS litigation.
From the Complaint, “Defendant Huhtamaki, Inc. (“Defendant”) advertises, markets and sells Chinet ‘eco-friendly’ disposable plates and bowls as compostable (the ‘Products’). A compostable product is one that will entirely break down into usable compost. The Products, however, contain significant amounts of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (‘PFAS’), which do not break down and never become part of usable compost.”
Buffalo, New York, Files PFAS/AFFF Lawsuit for “Foreseeable Contamination”
The Buffalo Water Board filed a lawsuit on October 14, 2026, against 17 companies, alleging that PFAS-containing firefighting foam contaminated Lake Erie, the source of drinking water for approximately 276,000 residents.
According to the complaint, “Plaintiff has detected PFAS in its surface water intake.”
From the complaint: “This action arises from the foreseeable contamination of surface water by the use of aqueous film-forming foam (‘AFFF’) products that contained per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (‘PFAS’), including perfluorooctanoic acid (‘PFOA’).”
According to the Buffalo Water Quality Report: 2026, “The PFAS story is genuinely favorable. Under New York’s testing requirements, Buffalo detected PFOS at an average of 2.07 ppt – below the EPA’s new 4 ppt maximum even at the top of its range (3.56 ppt) – and did not detect PFOA at all. For a Great Lakes industrial-legacy city, that is a strong result…”
The report also states, “Buffalo’s data does not justify PFAS-specific filtration spending; a lead-certified filter is the better use of the same dollars here.”
“Buffalo seeks damages for testing, monitoring, treatment and remediation. The lawsuit does not specify an amount, and it remains unclear whether customers have been exposed to unsafe PFAS levels through the city’s drinking water” (Source: Lawyers and Settlements).
Des Moines, Iowa, Seeks to Add to Previous PFAS Settlement
Des Moines Water Works previously reported, “Des Moines Water Works (DMWW) has received notice from the court-appointed claims administrator that it will be awarded $9.7 million from the 3M settlement in the nationwide PFAS litigation.” This settlement was in 2025.
On October 15, 2026, Axios reported that Des Moines Council members last week agreed to “retain New York law firm Grossman & Kelly to investigate potential damages related to PFAS and firefighting foam and gear, as well as separate claims involving microplastics and tobacco waste.”
The Axios report states that the law firm will “hire geologists and other experts to investigate at no up-front cost to the city.”
Litigating PFAS
While the 3M AFFF MDL lawsuit indicates some resolution to PFAS AFFF litigation, it seems doubtful that we have reached a peak in PFAS lawsuits. CERCLA liability for PFOA and PFOS may bring a new wave of litigation in the coming months and years.
If you have questions or need assistance with a PFAS-related issue, we can help. We have hands-on experience in the assessment/remediation of PFAS, and we have provided litigation support on several projects involving PFAS. For more information, contact Jeffrey Bolin, M.S., CHMM, at 248-932-0228, Ext. 125, or Matthew Schroeder, M.S., P.E., Ext. 117.
Alan Hahn drafted this blog. Alan has an undergraduate degree in Environmental Studies and completed a graduate program in Environmental Management. He has worked in environmental management for more than 45 years. He has written hundreds of blogs and articles. His published work includes Michigan Lawyers Weekly, Detroiter, Michigan Forward, GreenStone Partners, Manure Manager Magazine, Progressive Dairy, and HazMat Magazine.
Jeffrey Bolin, M.S., reviewed this blog. Jeff is a partner and senior scientist at Dragun Corporation. He is a published author, a frequent speaker, and an expert witness. His expertise in environmental due diligence, PFAS, vapor intrusion, and site assessments has led to projects in the US, Canada, and overseas. See Jeff’s Bio.
Follow Dragun Corporation on LinkedIn, X, or Facebook.
Sign up for our monthly environmental newsletter.
Principled Foundation | Thoughtful Advice | Smart Solutions
Established in 1988